[I calculated Vertex contacts for the usual SMA charts for a variety of events. In migrating this thread from the old site in 2017, I exclude the tracking of the hits, which can be recreated, and jump to conclusions and summations.]

I'm going to stop this project for now for lack of time AND an apparent result already.

The purpose of the test was to determine if the Vertex series of angles shows well in Sidereal mundane astrology. The first test was to simply tabulate them for "bad" events, just as in my White Hats & Black Hats test in Chapter 1 ofSMA. The result expect would be that Saturn and Mars would be on angles dramatically more often than Jupiter and Venus.

So far, we have very clear indications of the opposite. I have checked four topics, including two where human interaction was involved and two that were entirely natural phenomena (coalmine collapses, bombs, impact events, and warlike attacks). Of these, contacts to Vertex angles in the stack charts result in 27 instances of Venus or Jupiter, and 17 instances of Mars or Saturn!

At the very least, this is not what we would expect!

I actually toyed with the possibility that Vertex contacts were inherently suppressive (in the way that they represent unconscious motivation in natal charts). Might this Venus and Jupiter be a rheostat for suppressive benefic influence? That would be hard to substantiate, considering that there are some really striking examples, e.g., one of the charts for the 9/11 attacks (among others).

It appears, from the example categories checked thus far, that Vertex is highlighting random results, meaning, they are not actively contributing anything,

Anyone is welcome to take other categories I haven't gotten to, and finish them out to see if the results continue this way. The data are all in SMA.

I may need to revisit this. With the post I made last night on how to measure contact to the Vertex (including some surprises reflecting we often can't tell from the face of the chart when there is such a contact), the above work may all have been measuring the wrong thing.

I'm going to pick this up and revisit the tracking with current best-method of measuring Vertex contacts. In what follows, conjunctions with Vertex and Antivertex will be measured by a planet being within 3° of due east or west in azimuth. NP and SP will be ecliptical squares to Vertex within 2° (and these are, practically to the minute, the same as a planet being square in PV longitude). I'll tally them separately, across each category of bad event. For now, I'm excluding daily timing because that introduces new complexities - just solar and lunar ingresses.

For the purposes of this study, dormancy will be presumed to not be impacted by Vertex-family contacts. This has the advantage of making the analyzed charts exactly the same as those already consulted in the main discussion.

These are all quite weak and, with perhaps one exception, fairly evenly distributed. That one possible exception is Pluto, which is already suspect because its great showing comes from a single event. Additionally, studies already completed of Pluto's angularity in relation to the meridian and horizon show that Pluto is not characteristically angular for this kind of event. (It ranks 8th of the 10 planets for angularity.) Pluto's strong importance to volcanoes is in lunar aspects, where it ranks first.

No mundane event set is stronger or clearer than fires. Angularity is clear, with Mars, Saturn, and Neptune leading (as they do in lunar aspects); and the events are characteristically (if not uniformly) straightforward.

So far... so-so. The best showing is that, in the final combined results, Mars makes it to the top of the list. There are several things wrong, though (i.e., against what prior evidence would have us expect).

For Vx/Av contacts, Mercury is the clear leader. Mars is second, but the follow-up planets are mixed. Saturn and Neptune, which normally join Mars at the top, are near the bottom. - In the combined, Neptune is at the bottom, and Saturn is in the middle.

With that Mars-by-a-nose leader, though, it isn't horrible, so I'll continue with the wildfires.

These are quite random or, in the alternative, quite the opposite of what we expect. This sample alone is sufficient to sink the idea that the Vertex series of "angles" has anything to contribute of value to mundane astrology.

There just isn't any similarity, and the Vx-family angles make a mockery of astrological symbolism.

Though Mars did inch out Mercury on the fires, the overall pattern was not the same. Volcano results were inconclusive-to-poor, with the one possible sharp result being atypical to what we already know of angularity for volcanoes. And now earthquakes are greatly at odds with what we already know about earthquakes, and at odds with astrological symbolism.

I'm not going to waste any more time on these. Whether measured ecliptically or mundanely, and notwithstanding the occasional sharp-looking chart (good results and bad results both appear randomly, because it's random) Vertex-related contacts are of no value in mundane astrology.

'This does not rule out their value in natal charts, which is a matter to be addressed separately, but it quite strongly affirms that the Vertex family are in no sense "angles" in the same way as horizon and meridian intersections. For all mundane purposes, and perhaps for natal purposes, they can and should be ignored.

This does not contradict, however, the separate finding that mundane aspects are valid when formed between planets on meridian or horizon and planets on prime vertical. The geometry remains the same, and these have been performing impressively (though the study of them is less than half done, so I withhold final endorsement for the moment).

Arena asked earlier today if there was a difference of, say, flipping to the Vertex system instead of Ascendant system past a certain point in geographic latitude. My answer was that, from single case examples I could remember, there was nothing like that operative, but I hadn't looked pointedly.

In the above examples, the highest elevation events were the Laki volcano in Iceland and the Kamchatka earthquake in Siberia. Let's take a quick look at those, starting with what the report in Sidereal Mundane Astrology shows.

First, the Laki volcano, which erupted June 9, 1783, 9:00 AM, 64N04, 18W14, when Sun was in Taurus and Moon in Leo. By conventional way of looking at it, the Capsolar was dormant, the Cansolar took over and was +2, as were the Arisolar, Caplunar, and Canlunar. The Capsolar-based daily events scored am impressive +3, after which the poor Cansolar methods were unnecessary.

How does this break down on Asc vs. Vertex systems?

CANSOLAR: Sun-Pluto dominates the chart, as it does similar catastrophic events (including IIRC four of the five largest earthquakes on record). In this case, Sun is 0°52' above Ascendant, Pluto is 1°24' above Descendant, and the two are in 2°16' mundane opposition. No planets are on the Vertex axis or ecliptically square it.

ARISOLAR: This was driven by Uranus on MC and Moon-Pluto. There was no Ascendant play unless you count Uranus as also square Ascendant (which is unnecessary). Neptune is < 3° from Antivertex in azimuth, which weighs against it, since Neptune is the least angular planet for earthquakes (being angular, for example, in NO solar ingresses for all the catalogue earthquakes).

CAPLUNAR: As we round the corner to the month, Mars is < 3° from Descendant - the perfect planet. Saturn, though, is < 2° from Vertex in azimuth, the second best planet. This one we can call a tie.

CANLUNAR: Saturn is 5° from IC, but 2° from square Ascendant. Neptune is just over 2° from Ascendant. They are in 2°+ mundane square (they don't make the cut for an ecliptical square). No planets connect to the Vertex axis.

So, for history's deadliest earthquake, occurring at almost the Arctic Circle, the Ascendant/horizon remains fully effective and demonstrates this several times, while the Vertex/PV remains uninvolved except for one occasion (the one I called a tie).

Next, the Kamchatka quake, which occurred November 4, 1952, 16:58 UT, 52N45, 159E30. I've never thought of this as a fabulous example, and suspected it because this fourth strongest earthquake in history didn't kill anybody. It occurred with Sin in Libra and Moon in Taurus. Capsolar was again dormant, and the Cansolar scored a 0. The Libsolar, and Capsolar all scored +2, with the Week chart being a bit weaker at +1. Both sets of daily timers were +2.

How does horizon vs. prime vertical come out for the solar and lunar ingresses?

CANSOLAR: Not a very impressive chart, nothing to tip it clearly toward an earthquake. Primarily, Sun is rising with a little Venus and a little Uranus at the fringe. But also, nothing is on or square the Vertex.

LIBSOLAR: Uranus squares MC closely, with a wider spray of Saturn, Neptune, and Sun near IC and Pluto 4°+ below Ascendant. Saturn exactly squares Uranus, and this is the main point of it all. The angularities are correctly descriptive, but (other than a square from Mercury) Ascendant isn't involved. Similarly, nothing connects to Vertex.

CAPLUNAR: Mercury's close square to Ascendant keeps this from being dormant. The main angularities are then slightly wider, Sun 4° off IC and Pluto 4° above Ascendant, Sun-Pluto in 0°22' mundane square. Vertex does have a hit this time, with Mars 1°17' from it in azimuth. Rather than argue the advantages of Pluto vs. Mars, I suppose this one is a tie as well.

ARILUNAR: This is a mediocre chart, and arguably a bad one. Jupiter is most angular (on Dsc), with Sun and Pluto also foreground - again in mundane square, this time 0°20'. It's adequately descriptive of a chart where there was a high-magnitude, among-the-worst quake but nobody died. Nothing hits the Vertex.

This one isn't as acute a contrast, probably because it was a lesser event. With one tie, though, all the other viable activity involved horizon, not prime vertical.

Let's add some more. Next is the Lame Horse nightclub fire, December 5, 2009, 1:08 AM, Perm, Russia, which ai 58N00 56E15. Sun was in Scorpio and Moon in Gemini. The charts are already pretty strong for this after we pass the weaker Capsolar and hit the Libsolar (+2) and Arilunar (+2). The Caplunar is dormant.

CAPSOLAR: Jupiter square Ascendant fits only because it was a club event (with grandiose plans and over-the-top details for the show, and over-crowded, etc.). But nothing ties to the Vertex.

LIBSOLAR: The horizon is important for bring the highly pro-fire Sun-Moon conjunction to the angle - close and straddling Ascendant. (Mars is more widely foreground.) Nothing touches the Vertex system.

CAPLUNAR: Dormant. If we allow the Vertex framework to replace that of Ascendant, it isn't dormant, because Uranus squares Vertex (is in SP) 1°08'. Flipping the whole framework to azimuth, one then also gets a moderately foreground Pluto. The case could be made that the Vertex system is better in which one chart (which, otherwise, is just skipped).

ARILUNR: Several appropriate planets mark the angles, but it's all tied into the MC, not Asc. However, Vertex has no involvement.

So, if we count one chart that is dormant in the classic treatment but has activity in the Vertex scheme, then we get one vote for Vertex. Otherwise, Ascendant keeps holding its own.

You may want to go back and recalculate everything for the Exxon Valdez incident March 24, 1989, 12:04 AM YST, 60N50, 146W52. I'm not going to recalculate all of these and, with a quick read through my report, most of the activity on that dealt with MC.

You may also want to recalculate all the charts for the Russian space flight events, since Moscow I at a heightened latitude, and their usual launching site is even higher.

I want to end on the world's largest human-caused explosion, the detonation of the largest nuclear device ever - the Tsar Bomba - which occurred October 30,1961, 11:32 AM BAT, 73N48, 54E59. Sun was in Libra, Moon in Cancer. Year, Quarter, Month, and Week charts all scored _2. Capsolar-based daily markers scored +3.

CAPSOLAR: Sun and Saturn were on WP, Venus and Uranus more widely (6°) on horizon. A strong chart, but not a strong case for the horizon. Nothing ties to the Vertex.

LIBSOLAR: Uranus closely rises. (Sun is more widely on IC.) This is a strong vote for horizon. Nothing ties to Vertex.

CAPLUNAR: Pluto is strongest, but its connection is to MC (partile). Several other planets are foreground, of which the Mercury-Mars-Neptune conjunction is most interesting. Nothing ties to Vertex.

CANLUNAR: Sun, Mars, and Neptune hover around Ascendant. (Sun is exactly square MC, so is angular either way.) Nothing ties to Vertex.

So no, the evidence does not suggest that the horizon-based framework surrenders to the PV based framework at sufficient latitude. Even when that latitude is arctic, the examples speak to strong continued involvement of Ascendant and no reliable (and, usually, none at all) presence of Vertex.